Do you "know the flowers" in your craft?

The word “creativity” describes the making of something new.

As human beings, we don’t create something out of nothing.

We create new things by mixing and combining existing things…raw materials and ideas.

Inherent in the word “creativity” is originality, which also describes something new – something that stands on its own and is not derivative.

Within the word “originality” is “origin” – the place or time from which something new comes.

So what’s all this definition stuff about?

You and I may not be as creative as we think.

As a matter of fact, much of the work today generally referred to as “creative,” isn’t creative at all, by definition.

Because for it to be creative, it must be original.

For you and I to be creative, we must be original.

Not to mention, "There's nothing new under the sun," right?

We can’t be copycats or coattail Creatives.

Instead, we must see the familiar in unfamiliar ways.

We must “make strange”.

We must get as close to the source, the root, the origin of the creative impulse as we can possibly get.

The majority of “creative work” I encounter isn’t original at all.  And, I have to admit, that includes much of my own work.

It’s derivative work.

Which is why we must trace the roots of our craft to its origins.

We must, as Gary Snyder writes in the closing lines of his poem For The Children, “learn the flowers”.

What do you think?

Is the majority of work called "creative" today truly creative?

Or am I uncreative in my definition of creativity?

(photo by Nick Newell on Flickr)

Keitharsis helps Creatives prepare and prune themselves for the real work of their craft.  New essays are published each Tuesday and Thursday.

Comments

[Jason Vana]

I do believe we have a form of creativity - maybe not the ability to create something out of complete nothingness or something that isn't based on a previous creation (only God can do that), but I do believe we are able to take what we already have and be creative with it. We were made in the image of the Creator, so while our creativity may be limited, I think it is still creative.

[Keith Jennings]

Great perspective, Jason. Thanks!

What I'm teeing up is an exploration of how we define and use the word "creativity".

There is the type of "creativity" that you so eloquently capture, which is the use of combinations and connections while making something. This type of creativity is an act.

But there is also a type of "creativity" that exists as a stand-alone quality. This type of creativity is an intrinsic value.

My hope is to show how being creative (i.e. the act) does not guarantee creativity (i.e. the intrinsic value of an art or craft piece).

The reason I believe this is important is that a lot of Creatives get disillusioned and discouraged when their "creativity" (act) isn't valued as "creativity" (valuable). But understanding why helps us get there!

[Tony J. Alicea]

I'm absolutely with you on this. How much of what we create is truly original and undiscovered?

From my perspective as a Christian, I see God as the ultimate creator of all things and as His creation, He has given me His nature. Within that nature is to create.

So when you say "we must trace the roots of of our craft to its origins," to me I see that as seeking God and seeing His creation in new ways.

[Keith Jennings]

Love your comment, Tony! Thank you for taking time to share this.

[Barb Winters]

:-)

I agree with the comments above.

Still reading . . .

[Keith Jennings]

Barb,

I'm so thankful you are still reading! By the way, I enjoyed reading your Christmas letter and learning more about your family! Thank you for including me!

[Eileen]

"see the familiar in unfamiliar ways." I agree with this. The majority of what we write/create has been said before, there has to be a new and unique twist for it to leave an impression.

[Keith Jennings]

Exactly Eileen! Make sure to click on the link "make strange". Neat stuff hiding on the other side!